From: platootje@netscape.net
Date: Thu Jun 30 2005 - 09:22:26 BST
<hampday@earthlink.net> wrote:
>author was disappointingly lax in developing a metaphysics to support the
>MoQ. The closest he comes to it is a paper on "Subjects, Objects, Data and
>Values" (SODV) which I strongly recommend that you read. (You can access it
>on line from the MoQ home page.)
I will certainly go and read this
>
>Practically all of the debates in the DM revolve around various
>interpretations of statements appearing in the two major auto-biographical
>novels, ZMM and LILA --
>considered the sacred bible of MoQ loyalists. If you become one of those,
>you'll soon be talking in the language of levels and patterns about almost
>anything imaginable.
From what I read I have a lot of respect for the knowledge of many posters to this list, but I do not intent to focus on discussing about what Pirsig may or may not have meant with a certain sentence.
I have my own ideas and I think what Pirsig writes support those ideas, but my ideas are not limited or bound by the MoQ.
Before you pursue this course, however, I'd like to
>hear more about how you define "space" and what you have to say about
>"time".
>
>
I acknowledge the rest of your post, and will go and investigate the info you've provided. But first of all I want ot further explain my vision on space (I limit myself to space for now), and I will start to do this from a 'traditional' subject/object PoV.
If space exists it's either an entity or an attribute (excuse the lingo, English is a foreign language to me). Suppose it's an entity, eg. it exists independent of other things then why would it limit itself to our expanding universe? Or why did it not exist before the big bang? From those questions it's more likely to consider space as an attribute of matter, substance. There has never been a direct experience of space. We experience space because we experience substance in dimensions. So let's say space is an attribute of substance. Then what's between the substance? Given the fact that the acutal substance as a percentage of what we see becomes smaller and smaller (a molecule is mostly empty, as is an atom), then space being an attribute of substance isn't very likely.
Consider nothing, then consider the existence of one single smallest part (whatever that is), like a miniature big-bang, or a small-bang. Now how big is space at this point? Is it limited by the dimensions of this part of is it all of a sudden as big as our known universe? If it's limited to the part, then introduce a second part.... see the problem?
The need for space in SOM is the existence of dimensional substance. The quest to find what this substance has evolved into quatum physics. Lord knows what's gonna happen with space on that level...?
Most likely to consider space a concept then, it's matter nor energy. But a concept for what? More likely it's a concept the brain invented for survival.
We define space by the distance that light travels in a given time.
We define time based on the behaviour of a cesium-atom (or other atom?)
We do not directly experience space or time!
For me this means a lot of contradiction regarding the concept of space. But if you Apply the MoQ thoe contradictions disappear, but only if you no longer consider the existense of absolute, geometric space.
__________________________________________________________________
Switch to Netscape Internet Service.
As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register
Netscape. Just the Net You Need.
New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer
Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups.
Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 30 2005 - 09:27:26 BST